PAGE TWO
THE DAILY TAR HEEL
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1953
Can't Keep His Big Monmouth Shut!
Losing A Loser
It is hard to criticize a group which has
shown such an outstandingly fine spirit from
the first kickoff on. . .the Carolina support
ers But certain demonstrations during Satur
day's game cannot be overlooked.
The rooters' function is to support the
team. This calls for great enthusiasm (which
we're glad to see back this year), but never
for sheer emotionalism uncontrolled by good
taste and reason. Several times in the past
Carolina has been penalized for the unsports
manlike conduct of its supporters. To cause
a penalty against one's own team is bad. Far
worse, however? is the damage to the reputa
tion of the University.
Fortunately, no penalty was called Satur
day for this offense. The unfortunate thing
is that Carolina, the host school, displayed
poor qualities jwhich were witnessed not only
by all present but reported to the radio4is
teners and written up in the newspapers.
Such a yell as "The referee has no daddy"
might have been checked by the head cheer
leader. Instead, he chose to encourage the act
rather than stop the jeers.
v There was more at stake Saturday than
winning a football game. Too bad we had to
lose both.
Passing
Remark
Ron Levin'
Electivology
Anita Anderson-
You want the latest word on good electives? O. K.,
let's thumb through the catalog.
Here's a winner: Social insurance 194. What coed
wouldn't love to acquire this in addition to her other
pursuits of study? And here's one made to order for
all social chairmen: Organization of Parties 175. See,
a course for everyone. Also related to parties is
.Spenser 112.- !
Serigaphy 122? I don't now what it is either," but
it sounds impressive. And approaches to Drawing
44 might be interesting if your approach hasn't been
working too well lately.
It's all Greek to me, but ifyou want to get specific,
there's Greek mythology not a bad course to
elect anytime. If not Greek, try Beginning Sanskirl
111. Vulgar Latin 220?Sounds questionable.
No, I don't see that Arboretum course you're
heard about unless Pathology 161 is related. You
want a math elective? Here's one that doesn't sound
too "mathy": Normal Families 209.
Maybe Dr. Kinsey will give the last word on
Virology 120. Speaking of sectionalism, how about
Northern Painting 272?
If you want to be very active and win a lot of
honor and things, this Honors Course is aprapos.
Maybe the Old Well will even ring for if you're pro
ficient. Ycu say you'd just as soon take sedimenta
tion 247? O. K., gather your moss while you may.
The official student publication of the Publi
cations Board of the University of North Carolina,
.v. where it is published
r i n
if j Site of themveriy
it i
r
North CaroJm
, vhich first
opened s doors
- in Jaotwry -
daily except Monday,
examination and va
cation periods and
during the official
Summer terms. En
tered as second class
matter at the post
office in Chapel Hill,
N. C, under the Act
of March 3, 1879.
Subscription rates:
mailed, $4 per year,
250 a semester; de
livered, $6 a year,
$3.50 a semester.
Boyoboyoboy! (Sanskrit, trans,
hurrah!) At last some results. At
last public opinion has been
stirred enough to bring a whole
bag full of letters to the editor.
Congratulations to the students
who wrote in.
This proves three things.
(1) You do read The Daily Tar
Heel. (2) You read my column.
(3) You can read. I hate to take
time eut to answer you fellows
but the record must be set
straight.
To whom it may concern (Don
Henderen): I assure you, sir, that
writing a column for this paper
has not been my
only contribution to
this school. If you
had been here dur
ing freshman orien
tation week and
dropped in any night
at Graham Memorial in the main
lounge you might have seen
something. Ask most any fresh
man... he'll tell you. Though
my egotistic nature would like
to have me tell you in front of
all these readers, there just isn't
enough space. Don, if you must
write letters to the editor, please,
please, m'boy get the facts before
you take pen in hand. That way
they can't get you for libel.
To whom it may concern (Carl
(Billy Graham) Gregory: Carl,
you write fairly well, but your
talent is going to waste by mere
ly writing letters to the editor.
Hell, man, go first class. Write
a book of your memoirs and then
retire. In reference to Ralph
Long. If you had been sitting
with me that night watching him
in his cups resemble a fumbling
idiot and listening to him brag
about how he, Ralph Long, ex
posed some old grandmother, who
thirty years ago wore red socks
to a policeman's ball, you would
have thought twice before writ
ing your letter. If you had heard
what he said not knowing he was
being listened to, you would have
written a letter home instead of
to this paper. And may I quote
you Mr. Gregory. You say, "if
Long's testimony Is authentic".
And I say in answer to this if
bullfrogs had wings!
To whom it may concern (Art
Einstein): Art, your letter was
the most sensible and thought
ful of the group. You're absolute
ly right. My only purpose in dig
ging at the system in my column
was in the hope that in the mere
mention of the words, "honor
system", some students might be
stimulated to take more interest,
to activate their ideas, and to
wake up to the facts. I am not a
cynic, at least in this respect. I
am an idealist with regard to
ward the honor system, and my
only hope is that through this
column I can kindle the glowing
embers of the student body to
a flame equal to the 'days of
Davie and Hinton James. I am
rapidly losing hope.
To whom it may concern (Fred
C. Underwood): My dear boy. I
do not set myself up as a shin
ing example of what Carolina stu
dents should be as you said, sir.
For three years I was a (quote)
" no damned good student in a
fraternity house partying ' on
weekends". To tell the truth I
really enjoyed it, but there's more
so much more here than any of
us dreamed of. Fred, I didn't
praise myself, I condemned
others. There is a difference,
Palinurus Pours A New Cup Of Tea
79m .
Editor:
It is with great interest that
I note that Mr. Jay Pursel of
Scribner's has joined the literary
tea party. However, I am afraid
that the cup of tea which he
served up was a muddy mess of
liquid that was unbecoming so
fine a gentleman.
The cloudiest drops contained
his most convenient lapse of
memory. The Sunday of the week
he was here he and I dined at
the Monogram Club in the com
pany of three other literary gen
tlemen. If he will cast his mind
back, I am certain that he will
remember that stimulating oc
casion. At that time he and I en
gaged in a conversation of seme
hour and a half in length. Hence,
the information contained in my
original article came directly
"from the horse's mouth." And
I am not referring to Roger Wil
cde. Moreover, Mr. Pursel knows
who Palinurus is. He was inform
ed of the column, and seemed
pleased when a projected column
on Scribner's current best-selling
novelist, Alan Paton, was pro-
you know. I abhor being so petty,
but under the circumstances I
feel it is necessary. You called
my a hypocrite. A hypocrite is
one who is given to false pre
tenses as of virtue etc. I assure
you sir, such is not the case.
Please, buy yourself a good dic
tionary and use it.
Now my final advice to all
who wish to write letters to the
editor. I love to see these letters
pour in. They stimulate reader
ship of the paper and my column. ;
And here are some simple rules
to follow in writing such letters.!
(1) Type the letter neatly ont
whit paper ZVz by 10. 5
(2) Check it over for any possible j
errors. (3) Sign your name.
(4) Tear the letter neatly into
seven (no eight) pieces, throw
it in the wastecan and go see a
movie, bye now ...
posed.
Now for the specifics of his
letter. First, he uses such p'nrases
as "Gestapo tactics," "spite pro
fessors," and "grab the beer and
movie money" which are com
pletely irrelevant to the contro
versy, since those terms were not
even hinted at by Palinurus.
Secondly, one of his main ar
guments is that paper-bound
books go out of print because
the inventory problem would be
enormous. This is one of the
weakest bits of rationalization
that I have seen in a long time.
I need only point to the great
success of Penguin in producing
and maintaining in stock over a
thousand titles.
Third, he poinrs out that Rine
hart and Anchor still publish
good paper-bound editions. Yes,
granted. But Anchor has not yet
published a single modern Amer
ican novel, and if the practice
o f Scribner's i s continued
throughout the publishing world,
they won't be able to, either.
Moreover, Rinehart is restricted
in the same way by the recalling
of titles. Even Modern Library
has had to withdraw Heming
way's A Farewell to Arms.
Fourth, Mr. Pursel refers to
Scribner's "cheap" edition of
Hemingway at $1.75. I agree that
the volume is worth the price,
if one can afford it. However,
there is a great difference be
tween 25c and $1.75.
As for Mr. Fursels motive for
coming to Chapel Hill, I can only
surmise that, like the workers of
America, he has a "sliding scale"
depending on his action at the
moment. I do know that he ex
pressed concern over the letter
from Professor H. K. Russell
which was a protest against the
removal of titles from paper
bound editions.
Now, in regard to his refer
ences to the "Rathskellar rum
or" attributed to Palinurus, I
can reply that the article was
verified in the following way:
Mr. Pursel himself gave the
information that Scribner's made
only four per cent profit on
its books. He did not explain
that the profit was higher after
the costs were paid; he didn't
need to, for that is easily un
derstandable. But this latter bit
is an argument for reducing the
price to the consumer.
Moreover, I had a copy of his
reply to the letter of Professor
H. K. Russell. Mr. Pursel's let
ter is dated August 18, 1953. In
that letter he categorically makes
this statement concerning jthe
college sales of paper-bound
books: "The major outlets are
railroad stations, drug stores and
magazine stands throughout the
country. Strange as it may seem,
the college sale of Bantom books
is of little or no concern to the
distributor."
Furthermore, in regard to the
present status of the publishing
industry, not only did I get a
great deal of information from
Mr. Pursel, but I also talked with
Mr. Lambert Davis, head of the
University of North Carolina
Press, and Mr. George Scheer, a
former UNC Press man and pres
ently representing several pub
lishing firms.
Finally, I talked to Professor
Russell over the consequences of
this policy of the publishing in
dustry, and he told me that he
was greatly concerned about it.
What then is the effect of Mr.
Pursel's reply. After reading both
my original article and his let
ter, I can state emphatically,
"Nothing!" The following points
were the ones made in my orig
inal article, points which Mr.
Pursel's cup of tea neither clari
fied nor refuted:
1. Scribner's is withdrawing
works of certain well-known au
thors such as Hemingway and
Fitzgerald from the paper-bound
editions.
2. The result of this policy is
a much higher cost to the stu-
(See PALINURUS, page 4)
Editor
ROLFE NEILL
Managing Editor
LOUIS KRARR
Business Manager
JIM SCHENCK
THINK I'LL GO BACK-
'LONS AS HE SAIP WHAT Hg
eAio
Sports Editor
TOM PEACOCK
News Ed.
Associate Ed.
Feature Editor
Asst. Spts. Ed.
Sub. Mgr.
Circ. Mgr.
Asst. Sub. Mgr.
Asst. Business Mgr.
Society Editor
Ken Sanford
Ed Yoder
Jennie Lynn
Vardy Buckalew
Tom Witty
- Don Hogg
Bill Venable
Advertising Manager
Syd Shuford
Eleanor Saunders
Jack Stilwell
ON& op tou is
SO -HOW
ABOUT
IF 6MB AINTA
TAKZ AT THAT,
(
WHAT AftOUr
m a you
AYS,MACWM?
'A.
2BV
TKOUSAM'OF
EM - X
bXAZT
7 IVIW'.
TO
lWA'EV.f THE tCVEUY i
alu one i ivprzxr&vri
AUP..WHEN
7MII AN
DONE YOU
y Ti i
&6W Y A2g, MUM.YPAKDON M2
compv po&e it- wepoN
THIS'UL TVKB A t5lT. PAZPCH Mft
we weife A30ut- pajcconv-
&eACH w aMPEi?, PAepoM me
NMA'TBA7 OX
B'SCWT.
lY7
TO G0O&VS?
S TALIYIN--
pAJfPCWMgPA;.
PON M6 PARDON'
'V4
I
EDITORIAL STAFF (Bill O'Sullivan, Ron Levin,
Harry Snook, John Beshara, James Duvall.
NEWS STAFF Jennie Lynn, Joyce Adams, Dan
iel Vann, Anne Huffman, Fred Powledge, J. D.
Wright, Jerry Reece, Janie Carey, Richard
Creed, John Bijur, Ted Rosenthal, Jerry Epps,
Jess Nettles, Ronnie Danieles, Tom Lambeth.
BUSINESS STAFF Al Shortt, Dick Sirkin, Dave
Leonard.
SPORTS STAFF John Hussey, Sherwood Smith, N
Jack Murphy, Rooney Boone, Larry Saunders.
PHOTOGRAPHER Cornell Wright . D
I
A
B
Pf IN I I W4JT.?-DAISY MAE GOT V IT'S V
I PATCH? TAJL A CLEAN HOUSEf-SHE HER, y
Sja, rJVr5P SWEEPS IT ONCE A t A3AIN.7
AH'U. BE GlAD TO W mTfr-
(W6Rr THIS JA AHL.U
BACHELOR UNTIL ftrEACHW
cahip uawkim; rvw wow to
TO GIVE SOME HJOWjSAVEyaRE
GAL, A CHANCE
TO NAB HIM
YOU'LL
TEACH
ME?"
HAM'M
A TRACK
STAR.'.''
BUT-STRAiGHT HONESXN
1 RUNN1N WONT DO VO NO
GOOD ON SADIE HAWKINS
, DAY.V-VO' GOTTA BE.
PREPARED FO" DIRTY.
The Eye Of The Horse
Roger Will Coe-
2
THE HORSE was seated high in otherwise empty
Emerson Field seats and wagging his head in lugu
brious concern. I wondered what gave?
"A pain gives," he responded disconsolately. "Ii
the current trend prevails, Sports will be as synthe
tic as some of the new so-called wonder fabrics. No
wonder Baseball's box-office is dropping, and people
are staying away from Big-Time Football in ever
increasing numbers."
How did he mean?
"Well, take Baseball Commis
sioner Ford Frick's careful
screening of normal tempers and
juicy repartee in big-league
games. Shucks, half the fun of
the old-timers rivalries was in
watching the rhubarbs over plays
and decisions. Vm not saying
they should go so far as the old
time Giant-Cub rivalry, when the
termination of evei$r game would
see the opponents retire under
the grandstands to continue their altercations with
out benefit of interference by the umpires. But to
have some big-leaguer with loving-cup ears and
ham fists and the temper of a gamecock say, No
comment', when asked about a certain play, or a
certain wise-crack flung from the enemy bench
well, this is approaching emasculation of the game."
He meant that Casey Stengel-Chuck Dressen ar
gument that was hushed up so fast and unnatural
ly? "Yeah," The Horse nodded, trying to get the wax
paper cover off a Scuttlebutt sandwich and compro
mising by swallowing the whole thing. "Don't taste
any different this way," he explained when I look
ed askance. "And how about Irv Noren, of the
Yanks, being, fined for waving, what they called a
derisive towel at the official-scorers when they call
ed a Billy Martin bingle an error instead of a hit?
How is this I ask you? What have we got here, the
U. S. Supreme Court, or a bunch of hard-boiled,
tried by fire and fire-water sportswriters, manning
the official scorer seats? Used to be when a sports
writer got a towel waved at him it contained a brass
spitoon in it."
That was silly, yes.
"And how about whatever it was happened in the
Tar Heel-Terp game at Kenan, last Sat'day? A
Maryland ball-toter collided with a Carolina tackier,
and the tackier came up with the ball and beat it
scoreward? The play was nullified, and Carolina
was whacked fifteen yards for Unsportsmanlike Con
duct. What unsportsmanlike conduct? Had the Tar
Heel made out he had caught the ball on the fly,
and he hadn't? Should he have set a date to a public
and official return of the ball to the rightful owner
thereof? Had someone on the bench said a naughty
word, or the disappointed Tar Heel himself done
so? What?"
Wasn't that the official's business?
"And that of every spectator there, too," The
Horse growled. "Where do the officials think their
dough comes from, bushes Trees?"
The Horse was the only one I knew lived off those.
"Well, the officials at that game belong in trees,
and I do not mean they are birds," The Horse snap
ped. "If they weren't kissing Jim Tatum's foot, it
was only because his shoe was in the way."
I thought this was unsportsmanlike. This sort of
talk.
"It's normal, human, and American, too," The
Horse said. "It vwould be nice if our Sports were,
I think."
CREDO
Todd
Night Editor for this issue:
Ken Sanford
The constitution of the United States is a highly
interesting document. James Madison is said to be
the father thereof, and the more conservative minds
of the country in 1789 approved of the work of
Goveneur Morris, who is generally credited with
writing the final draft.
At the time of the writing of the constitution,
perhaps the most important feature in it was the
great power given by the framers to the federal
government at the expense of the states. But pro
bably the most controversial feature of the consti
tution today is the civil liberties granted thereby to
the several persons who make up our union.
The great bulk of these civil liberties are in
cluded in the first ten amendments, which were
adopted in 1791. One of the most interesting of
these ten is the first. It says: "Congress shall make
no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right
of the people peaceably to assemble, and to peti
tion the government for a redress of griveances."
Obviously, the framers of these amendments felt
that the danger of conformity enforced upon the
people was far worse than any peril of dissention.
Moreover, if enough people dissented, or petitioned,
something must be so wrong as to require rectifying.
Further, the framers felt that provided no legiti
mate law were broken in the process of exercising f
this right to think, one need not be called on to
answer for it ("Congress shall make no law . .").
To bring this up to the present day, there are a
great many laws on the congressional books deal
ing with such actions as espionage and sabotage
and the constitution itself defines treason (not so
that we will know what it is, but rather what it is
not.)
Occasionally, if some Senator or Congressman
feels that one of us is in a position to inform them
on certain subjects, they call us before a congres
sional committee of one sort or another, and call
upon us to testify to a good deal for which we are
in no way responsible to Congress. Or one may, if
certain conditions are fulfilled, be called as a witness
at trial hearings. We may ask if we are now or ever
have been a memeber of the Communist Party.
After a perusal of the first amendment, it ap
pears to me that the refusal to answer a question
which has a moral persuasion as its objective is
quite proper. This statement should not be taken to
approve or condone illegal acts, but as yet it is not
illegal to join the Communist Party. If Congress or
the courts are interested in acts of espionage then
they should ask whether or not we have committed
them alone or in conjunction with certain other
(See CREDO, page 4)